On Sun, Oct 29, 2023 at 1:42 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 26/10/2023 09:19, Huacai Chen wrote: > > Hi, Krzysztof > > > > On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 3:16 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On 25/10/2023 03:56, Huacai Chen wrote: > >>> Hi, Krzysztof, > >>> > >>> On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 8:18 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 10:51:35 +0100, > >>>> Binbin Zhou <zhoubb.aaron@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi Krzysztof & Marc: > >>>>> > >>>>> Sorry for the interruption. > >>>>> As said before, we tried to use the 'interrupt-map attribute' in our > >>>>> Loongson liointc dts(i), but there are some unfriendly points. > >>>>> Do you have any other different suggestions? > >>>> > >>>> I don't have any suggestion, but if you are still thinking of adding > >>>> some extra crap to the of_irq_imap_abusers[] array, the answer is a > >>>> firm 'NO'. > >>> Excuse me, but as described before, 'interrupt-map' cannot be used for > >>> liointc unless adding it to of_irq_imap_abusers[], can we still use > >>> 'parent_int_map' in this case? Or just change it to 'parent-int-map' > >>> to satisfy the naming style? > >> > >> Why do you respond to me? You received firm 'NO' about > >> of_irq_imap_abusers, so how adhering to naming style or violating naming > >> style has anything to do with it? > > I'm sorry but of_irq_imap_abusers is to make 'interrupt-map' to work, > > without of_irq_imap_abusers we can only use the existing > > 'parent_int_map'. We need your response because we want to know > > whether you can accept the existing method since the other approach > > has received 'NO'. And, changing 'parent_int_map' to 'parent-int-map' > > can be a little better, at least it satisfies the naming style. > > Indeed, interrupt-map might not fit here. I don't know whether your > custom property - purely for runtime performance purpose - will be > accepted. Initial description of this field suggested that it is OS > policy, not hardware choice. But sure, propose something with > justification, so we can review it. The proposal must not break ABI, so > you must support both parent_int_map and parent-int-map (or whatever we > call it) properties. The first we will probably deprecate. > Hi Krzysztof: Thanks a lot for your reply and suggestion! I'll try to split the change points into separate patches in the next version, it might be better understood. Thanks. Binbin > The way this property was sneaked into kernel bypassing review is still > disappointing. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
